We are an eBay affiliate and may be compensated for clicks on links that result in purchases.
Tags:
I just noticed this post thanks to...ummm...Thurston's comment. I think that the Clapton is more likely genuine than not...I give it a 70% chance of being real. The i and c concern me more than anything, but Clapton signs them in a wide range.
I understand Mr Steffman's comment about the cross of the T curving up instead of flat or down, but I've seen that on genuine examples.
The "Eric" only Clapton style would be a valuable signature study.
100% Legit
No charge for you my friend ;)
Mr Steffman.... one more time
And I quote you...
"Reading and comprehending evidence based on a pool tainted with wrongly authenticated samples is not helpful at all.
Both a proper pool and this ability are mutually important."
First.... No one mentioned a tainted pool, so let's just leave the obvious crap out of this.
Second... After reading Steve Cyrkin's response I will say this.... You have an impressive artillery of background authenticator's. All of whom I respect.
And if you use them, then I assume you respect them too right?
Let's take it a bit further....
Mr Epperson said this Eric signature is Legit !!
Do you see my concern?
Today is a holiday for me so I won't be here much, but I want to remind people to treat others decently. NEVER make things personal. I'm starting to suspend members who do that, usually after a warning.
copy that captain
enjoy your day off
we'll hold the fort for ya ;)
Thanks, Goodcat. But stop shooting at those on your side of the wall.
gotchya
and... that's an interesting euphemism ;)
I will give you another, more recent, example of how the "power of authentication services" can be corrupt. I had a Rolling Stones set of signatures I purchased from a member here. It's been awhile but I believe he also had Roger Epperson take a look at it and it was "fine"(quick opinion). Here is a link to the item found on my photo page here at the site.
https://live.autographmagazine.com/photo/rolling-stones-2?context=user
I had it listed on eBay for several months, then out of the blue, it was removed. Was it because it was clearly a forgery? Not! This is not the only example. And people complain here that obvious forgeries are never removed? I paid good money for this and spent even more to create the piece. Feel free to give me your thoughts on it if you want.
I assume, since eBay seems to be moving closer to a PSA association that the removal may have originated there. Just my personal thought process of who since eBay does not need to tell us who disputes the signatures.
This type of example bother me just as much as seeing obvious forgeries being sold in quantities by "power sellers". This is just another example where abused power has consequences. I may note again that I've had a Roger Epperson certified piece removed in the past as well.
What does a small time collector do? When this happens, who should I decide to authenticate it when I don't know who or why it was pulled. It's forever tainted. That costs time and money as well.
I am not saying your service does or will do this in the future. I'm not being overly critical but these are issues I deal with all the time. I have more examples but will stop my rant here.
Posted by CJCollector on November 11, 2024 at 6:03pm 0 Comments 1 Like
Posted by CJCollector on November 9, 2024 at 2:32pm 7 Comments 0 Likes
Posted by CJCollector on October 30, 2024 at 3:13pm 2 Comments 0 Likes
© 2024 Created by Steve Cyrkin, Admin. Powered by
Badges | Report an Issue | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service